Alleged Consequential Damages Do Not Preclude Reinstatement

The Wisconsin Supreme Court agreed with the Office of Lawyer Regulation that a suspended attorney had substantially complied with the order and should be reinstated, notwithstanding the objection of the aggrieved former client

We further agree with the OLR that V.B.’s written comments should not preclude Attorney Pleas’ reinstatement, nor trigger the imposition of restitution to V.B. as a condition of reinstatement. We did not order Attorney Pleas to pay restitution to V.B. in our September 29, 2020 disciplinary decision.

…in this case, V.B. seeks consequential damages; i.e., damages resulting from Attorney Pleas’ alleged malpractice in failing to timely bring a personal injury lawsuit regarding her second automobile accident. The disciplinary process is neither intended nor designed to handle the questions of causation, contributory negligence, mitigation, burdens of proof, and other issues that would need to be resolved in order to determine V.B.’s consequential damages.

(Mike Frisch)